<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2007 (11) TMI 261 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30391</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, ruling that the demand for Service Tax was not sustainable. The appeal filed by the Revenue was found to be not maintainable due to the incorrect authorization order signed by a Single Commissioner. The Tribunal held that the appeal should have been filed before the Commissioner of Central Excise for revision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69047" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 261 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30391</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, ruling that the demand for Service Tax was not sustainable. The appeal filed by the Revenue was found to be not maintainable due to the incorrect authorization order signed by a Single Commissioner. The Tribunal held that the appeal should have been filed before the Commissioner of Central Excise for revision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30391</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>